Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

jeff-vogel.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 552 posts

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#361

Post by dwild »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #84

> People who grew up with Nintendo and Sega really like pixel art. As one of those people, I really don't like pixel art at all. Today's pixel art looks nothing like games did back in the day. The simple reason is that those Nintendo and Sega games weren't played on 27" 4k LCD monitors or 65" OLED TV's but on on the barely 14" CRT in my bedroom. We didn't have huge pixely sprites, they were small and blurry. It had a…

> The simple reason is that those Nintendo and Sega games weren't played on 27" 4k LCD monitors or 65" OLED TV's but on on the barely 14" CRT in my bedroom. We didn't have huge pixely sprites, they were small and blurry. It had a way softer look than todays pixel art does.

My GB/GBC/GBA games were very rarely played on a 14" CRT.

> To me, the whole pixel art craze looks like false nostalgia. People longing back to something that never existed that way.

Its certainly could be helped by nostalgia, but that pixel art never existed because you only saw it on a blurry CRT? Yeah keep burying your head into the ground like only your taste existed.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#363

Post by Majromax »

jayd16 wrote: post #293
Majromax wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the context of the discussion was about developers instead of artists, how would HackerNews feel about someone lamenting the fact that they can't get any "affordable" developers to work on their projects? I'm not sure the reaction would be all that negative, to be honest. The problem to me isn't when someone says "we want cheap work and we understand it will not be particularly high-quality," but when they say "…

His problem, and you can see from his wording, is that he thinks about "graphics" not "art." Sure he made a 3d game. So what. He doesn't seem to have the same passion for art direction as he does for game design so its not surprising at all that you can throw money at the wrong problem and not get much out.

> He doesn't seem to have the same passion for art direction as he does for game design so its not surprising at all that you can throw money at the wrong problem and not get much out.

I think that's the most robust critical takeaway from this Hacker News thread. Vogel feels as if marginal spending on art assets is unprofitable, but if a root problem is instead artistic consistency then more expensive art is not necessarily (much) more effective art.

That said, this also doesn't negate Vogel's business point, that it's always worth examining what's "good enough" to optimize return. Suppose Vogel doesn't have and can't easily develop a good artistic eye for consistency; it's still probably not worth it to hire someone else to do it for him.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#364

Post by acomjean »

Honestly this rubbed me the wrong way. Almost like its a point of pride that his art is bad.

I think the real question is:

If he made the games look better would he sell enough more to justify the cost? He feels strongly not. But one has to wonder, how many people look at say pass, without even trying. Or go the other way an just do a "Dwarf Fortress" and go straight to ascii.

I guess the economics work for him, as is.

People are fickle, and do infact judge books by their covers to some extent and in a crowded market. If you went to but something from a website that had a late 90s web ascetic, you might choose to go to one that looks a little more modern.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#365

Post by bachmeier »

ixtli wrote: post #355

I would rather modern games look a bit more "like crap" and have even a 10th of the gameplay depth and quality of Spiderweb games than his games getting any better. I guess I'm also one of those people who grew up on the SNES and on Avernum and etc., but i know many younger people who feel the same as i do!

> I would rather modern games look a bit more "like crap" and have even a 10th of the gameplay depth and quality of Spiderweb games than his games getting any better.

That's what I was thinking. One of the things about games from back in the old days (I'm thinking 1980s) is that they had to be fun to play, because they didn't offer much else. Today there is an emphasis on looking good, but the game itself usually isn't great.

My hypothesis is that selling good-looking games that suck is more profitable. The graphics sell the game. Then the kids get tired of it and buy a new one. If the game is good, they'll just keep playing it and not open their wallet.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#366

Post by EpicEng »

Majromax wrote: post #254
Goronmon wrote: post #214

I wonder what the sentiment would be if the situation was reversed. Here we have a developer effectively looking to pay below market rates for artists, and then unsurprisingly not finding many good artists willing to do that long term. Not a judgment on my part, just saying that he's looking to keep the art budget to an absolute minimum. Instead if it was an artist defending his choice to make relatively simple games…

> If the context of the discussion was about developers instead of artists, how would HackerNews feel about someone lamenting the fact that they can't get any "affordable" developers to work on their projects? I'm not sure the reaction would be all that negative, to be honest. The problem to me isn't when someone says "we want cheap work and we understand it will not be particularly high-quality," but when they say "…

>Finding talented, reliable, reasonably priced freelancers is HARD

He wants the talent, but he finds talented artists to demand an unreasonable amount of money. To me it's him that comes off as unreasonable.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#367

Post by Narishma »

cannonedhamster wrote: post #194

I grew up playing the Exile series on shareware, then I migrated to Avernum. I have yet to find any series of games that I can get more value out of. The sheer depth in the games Spiderweb software puts out is why I'll buy pretty much everything they make. If I had to pick a gaming hill to die on this developer would be it. The graphics do their job. Could they be flashier? Sure, whatever. Aside from the Elder Scroll…

The issue is not that the graphics aren't flashy, whatever that means, it's that they are inconsistent.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#368

Post by uhoh-itsmaciek »

nothis wrote: post #336

I'm super happy that games that look and feel like those from Spiderweb Software exist. I think it's charming. But the fact that he feels compelled to write an article in defense of the art style is telling to me. I think it's not unreasonable to answer the headline question with "because they're stubborn". Their games look crap, not because of a lack of resources but because of a disrespect for visual design (it's n…

Absolutely. I think it's telling that the one piece of artistic criticism he admits he wants to fix is that characters are looking diagonally, which seems trivial compared to other visual design issues in the game.

Part of the problem seems to be that his critics range from the unrealistic "Just™ triple your budget and make it look competitive with AA games" to the more practical "why not think about visual design more coherently and address some of the low-hanging fruit to make your games more approachable and broaden your audience?" and he's lumping everything into one big WONTFIX pile.

But at the end of the day, if he's found an audience and can support his family, more power to him.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#369

Post by NateEag »

atoav wrote: post #83
alttab wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeff has had 25 years to get good at it. Based on the reasoning in his article, it seems like he didn't try.

That would be my guess too. Another guess would be that for him visuals have simply never been a thing that was all that important – otherwise he would have tried to learn a thing or two about this important part of games on his journey. The thing people need to realize is that in compound arts like games, films, theatre every part is important. You can do a film with poor lighting if every other aspect is great and…

> But you can't make films for 25 years and decide sound isn't all that important – unless you want to look like a complete amateur.

Given that he's making a living with his current strategy, and has been for twenty-five years, he is by definition not an amateur, let alone a complete one.

Indeed, the amateur is more likely the person who insists on making every aspect match their aesthetic ideal. They are not giving thought to what could make them profitable, instead focusing on building something that is precisely what they want.

Re: Why All of Our Games Look Like Crap

#370

Post by nothis »

ebg13 wrote: post #141

Oh man. This thread is really something else. Like...for miles in every direction, all I can see are pitchforks, and here I am standing alone on a small hill thinking to myself "Holy shit. That's the Spiderweb software guy. I've played every single one of his games, EVERY SINGLE ONE, and loved all of them." The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be to make wonderful story-driven RPGs.

I'm with you on the games being excellent examples of a super niche style done well but he's basically writing an article attacking the very concept of art direction as a waste of resources. That comes off a little disrespectful towards people who care.

I think there's no point in making their games looking any different than they do (because it's part of their brand, now) but the correct response to a question of why they don't make a "better" looking game is that they don't care. Or, maybe, it's a taste issue. Flailing your hands about how people totally did not appreciate you going through the trouble of making the graphics isometric or hiring underpaid artists is not the way to go. It's maybe "honest" but it's IMO at best a misunderstanding of and at worst a severe lack of respect for art direction and visual design.

Post reply on HN